Van Der Garde court case set for Wednesday verdict

News broke last week that ousted Sauber reserve driver Giedo Van der Garde had launched a last minute legal challenge to try and reclaim a Sauber race drive he was promised last year. The verdict was expected to come today, however this has now been pushed back until Wednesday as the uncertainty remains.

Van Der Garde has already been reported on here last week, although today a decision was expected to be made in the Australian courts. After the day's hearing, the case was adjourned, with the courts Twitter page stating "Judgement reserved in F1 driver Giedo van der Garde dispute against Sauber, to Wed, 10am."

In today's proceedings, Sauber's defense lawyer Rodney Garrett QC put forward the teams argument that it would be unsafe for Van Der Garde to be re-installed to the team with only a number of days before the start of the 2015 season.

He stated on behalf of the team "Mr Van der Garde has no experience driving the C34 Ferrari and would not have sufficient time to learn." He later also added that giving Van Der Garde the drive with no previous testing going into the season "would result in an unacceptable risk of physical harm or even death."

On the other side, Van Der Garde own lawyer Tom Clarke stated that the team could make adjustments to the car to suit every driver, before adding "Sauber does have the ability to substitute Mr Van der Garde this weekend for one or another driver without falling into breach of those existing contracts."

This now means that the Judge Justice Croft will deliver a verdict on Wednesday morning on this case. For either side this is a undesireable situation, with both sides in the dark going into the beginning of the 2015 F1 season. For both sides this is the worst possible way to begin the season, as both will have been severely distracted this week and if Van Der Garde does reclaim his seat it will leave him woefully unprepared for the 2015 season. It shall be interesting to see who comes out on top in this bizarre court case on Wednesday.

What are your thoughts on this case? Please feel free to comment below.

The reasoning of Sauber is nonsense: if one of the today drivers get sick, then there still be two drivers at the start upcoming weekend. Guido could drive for sure, but it is not a welcome thought i believe. Driving in a F1 car with no support from the team is not something to take lightly.

I don't think Giedo will be in the car this weekend. Sauber is trying to slow the process down, Wednesday whatever the outcome will be, they will appeal it. As long as the appeal is going Giedo cant do anything about it. Sauber just gambles on that and hope they can get it over the weekend. Then after the race the verdict doesn't make sense anymore as the race is done. Then this whole circus will start all over again for the next race.

Not even two years ago when Caterham first signed VDG did everyone fixate not on what he was doing against Hamilton and Vettel in Formula 3, but what he wasn't doing in four years of GP2 after winning the FR3.5 title at a time before the level of competition was what it has been in the last three seasons - before "buying his ride" at Caterham and displacing Heikki Kovalainen. Who had already moved up to F1, won a race, and been sacked by three different teams in the six years that it took VDG to make it to F1 out of F3.

In his one year of F1 to date, Van der Garde was down 8-11 in qualifying (42.1%), 4-8 in race results (33.3%), and 367-447 (45.1%) in laps led on teammate Charles Pic. Superb drives at Monaco and Spa not withstanding, VDG is a sub-par producer at a backmarker team.

Now let's use Marcus Ericsson last year as a benchmark, he has exactly one year of F1 experience at that same team. Ericsson was down 4-10 in qualifying (28.6%), 2-5 in race results (28.6%), and 110-413 in laps ahead (21%). But across the paddock to Ericsson that year were both Kamui Kobayashi, who is unilaterally considered by the F1 community to be a much more capable and experienced driver than Charles Pic was, and for one race, it was Andre Lotterer, who is unquestionably the best endurance racer in the world today with TK's retirement. Still a subpar producer over the course of a season, but Ericsson had a tougher benchmark to measure up to than VDG did.

So, if Sauber has found a driver in Ericsson who will give them roughly the same pace as VDG, but also one that is younger (Ericsson turns 25 compared to VDG who turns 30), and more importantly brings as much, if not more money than VDG, then I fail to see where Sauber are unjustified in going with a driver like Ericsson over Van der Garde in the off-season - especially when the team had to change out their entire driver lineup as a means to re-tooling after their worst ever season.

And it will be all settled on Wednesday and largely forgotten by this time next week. But hypothetically, let's say Van der Garde wins the case and deposes one of their current drivers. He won't be any faster than Marcus Ericsson, who wasn't really as fast as Felipe Nasr in testing.

Unless he is ordered to replace Nasr, in which case Sauber, a team that is on the brink and seeking to score championship points for the first time in over a calendar year, now has to field two drivers who were both slower than their teammates as rookies for the slowest team in Formula 1 the last two seasons. It's not 2008 any more and VDG is not on the caliber of a Stoffel Vandoorne, or an Esteban Ocon, or a Raffaele Marciello, or a Robin Frijns, or a Dean Stoneman. They're still slugging away at the minor leagues because they have no money or no competitive F1 seats, while a 30-year-old career minor leaguer is using power of attorney to buy his way back in.

Not even two years ago when Caterham first signed VDG did everyone fixate not on what he was doing against Hamilton and Vettel in Formula 3, but what he wasn't doing in four years of GP2 after winning the FR3.5 title at a time before the level of competition was what it has been in the last three seasons - before "buying his ride" at Caterham and displacing Heikki Kovalainen. Who had already moved up to F1, won a race, and been sacked by three different teams in the six years that it took VDG to make it to F1 out of F3.

In his one year of F1 to date, Van der Garde was down 8-11 in qualifying (42.1%), 4-8 in race results (33.3%), and 367-447 (45.1%) in laps led on teammate Charles Pic. Superb drives at Monaco and Spa not withstanding, VDG is a sub-par producer at a backmarker team.

Now let's use Marcus Ericsson last year as a benchmark, he has exactly one year of F1 experience at that same team. Ericsson was down 4-10 in qualifying (28.6%), 2-5 in race results (28.6%), and 110-413 in laps ahead (21%). But across the paddock to Ericsson that year were both Kamui Kobayashi, who is unilaterally considered by the F1 community to be a much more capable and experienced driver than Charles Pic was, and for one race, it was Andre Lotterer, who is unquestionably the best endurance racer in the world today with TK's retirement. Still a subpar producer over the course of a season, but Ericsson had a tougher benchmark to measure up to than VDG did.

So, if Sauber has found a driver in Ericsson who will give them roughly the same pace as VDG, but also one that is younger (Ericsson turns 25 compared to VDG who turns 30), and more importantly brings as much, if not more money than VDG, then I fail to see where Sauber are unjustified in going with a driver like Ericsson over Van der Garde in the off-season - especially when the team had to change out their entire driver lineup as a means to re-tooling after their worst ever season.

And it will be all settled on Wednesday and largely forgotten by this time next week. But hypothetically, let's say Van der Garde wins the case and deposes one of their current drivers. He won't be any faster than Marcus Ericsson, who wasn't really as fast as Felipe Nasr in testing.

Unless he is ordered to replace Nasr, in which case Sauber, a team that is on the brink and seeking to score championship points for the first time in over a calendar year, now has to field two drivers who were both slower than their teammates as rookies for the slowest team in Formula 1 the last two seasons. It's not 2008 any more and VDG is not on the caliber of a Stoffel Vandoorne, or an Esteban Ocon, or a Raffaele Marciello, or a Robin Frijns, or a Dean Stoneman. They're still slugging away at the minor leagues because they have no money or no competitive F1 seats, while a 30-year-old career minor leaguer is using power of attorney to buy his way back in.

Sauber cannot afford that.

Click to expand...

Well if Sauber can't afford it they shouldn't have made agreements they couldn't stick to.

We're not talking about who is better, neither are the courts. We're talking about who is right. It seems that VDG kept Sauber afloat with his money with the promise of a race seat, then got shafted when I'm sure the money was already spent (We know it was spent because they were taking Ericssons money before the season was even over)

If that is the case then Kaltenborn is a thief. An outright thief. And I hope she gets taken to the cleaners. I hold Bernie in higher regard. He might be unfair but he's never stolen from anybody as far as we know.

JWB 96-13Staff

So, if Sauber has found a driver in Ericsson who will give them roughly the same pace as VDG, but also one that is younger (Ericsson turns 25 compared to VDG who turns 30), and more importantly brings as much, if not more money than VDG, then I fail to see where Sauber are unjustified in going with a driver like Ericsson over Van der Garde in the off-season - especially when the team had to change out their entire driver lineup as a means to re-tooling after their worst ever season.

Click to expand...

It is rumoured that VdG in total had somewhere between 15 and 20mill GBP over the two years (2014 & 2015). While Ericsson according to Swedish media is bringing 10 mill GBP, where 7 was paid in advance in 2014. So if those are true, it's more of a "We have taken as much as we can from VdG, but with Ericsson we can get more for 2015".
And it's not about "justified" when it comes to money or performance (where VdG was clearly better than Ericsson in GP2, even with Ericssons season in the best team by far, DAMS).

And it will be all settled on Wednesday and largely forgotten by this time next week. But hypothetically, let's say Van der Garde wins the case and deposes one of their current drivers. He won't be any faster than Marcus Ericsson, who wasn't really as fast as Felipe Nasr in testing.

Click to expand...

Theoretically and irrelevant to the case.

while a 30-year-old career minor leaguer is using power of attorney to buy his way back in.

Sauber cannot afford that.

Click to expand...

While a 30yo person, have to use lawyers to get what he is contracted to - and what is rightfully his.

Well if Sauber can't afford it they shouldn't have made agreements they couldn't stick to.

We're not talking about who is better, neither are the courts. We're talking about who is right. It seems that VDG kept Sauber afloat with his money with the promise of a race seat, then got shafted when I'm sure the money was already spent (We know it was spent because they were taking Ericssons money before the season was even over)

If that is the case then Kaltenborn is a thief. An outright thief. And I hope she gets taken to the cleaners. I hold Bernie in higher regard. He might be unfair but he's never stolen from anybody as far as we know.

Click to expand...

To the bold bit: I haven't even looked at it that way, but if this really is the chronological way of facts I can understand even more now why VDG made his way to (first) the arbitration committee and now to the court.

As to the last paragraph, that's quite a statement to make. I can see where it came from and following your arguments I can see why you word it like that. But the comparison to Bernie is a little over the top really

While a 30yo person, have to use lawyers to get what he is contracted to - and what is rightfully his.

Sauber screwed up - and that shows in their "defence".

Click to expand...

Precisely, unfortunately seeing more details about the case it seems more and more that Sauber did screw up and VDG's case is becoming more waterproof by the minute. Those defensive statements of Sauber in court are quite easily disputed/rebutted by VDG's side.

a) Commitment is with VDG's company and not VDG himself. Hmm, well who's the beneficiary of VDG's company, that's right VDG himself. And still a contract with VDG's company stating that VDG himself is promised a race seat for 2015, still grants VDG himself a race seat and not just his company, imo. (of course I don't know the ins and outs of this one, but this dispute has settled in front of the arbitration committee already I think)

b) VDG does not have a F1 licence to drive in F1. So VDG's legal team hands the judge a copy of VDG's valid F1 licence.

c) VDG had not had a drivers' seat fitting, which is a process that takes two weeks? Nah, VDG had a previous seat fitted within 3 days according to his legal team.

d) Dangerous because he has no experience in the car? If VDG in the C34 is dangerous, what about Stevens in Manor MR03, that's just lethal!

I mean come on, every single argument Sauber brought to the table seem pretty weak to me and the counter arguments by VDG's legal team seem pretty watertight to me. I will be keeping a close eye to the verdict on Wednesday morning (or tomorrow evening UK time really).

Verdict is that VDG must race this weekend, any appeals by Nasr or Ericsson can be expedited to as early as this afternoon (in Australia time) however. VDG says he is ready to drive and has a good relationship with the team.

I can't argue with the verdict of not one but two courts in two different countries, but it's still not setting right with me for some reason.